Skip to main content

About your Search

KRON (MyNetworkTV) 4
( more )
English 98
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 98 (some duplicates have been removed)
the long term effects of our deficit, which are directly tied to health care -- the work that has been done in the congress as it relates to constructing and exchange that will take place in 2014 and go into effect, and the tools that we provided a initially on a concept that by its very nature was one designed by republicans, that there is ample room for us to tackle the unbelievable rise in cost of health care to 17% of our gross domestic product by focusing on dropping those costs. most recently the president of aetna said very clearly -- not only if we drop those costs would we make health care more affordable, we would also deal with balancing our national debt. so these are all very constructive areas that we all should agree to. that the american public wants us to pursue. we remain optimistic because of the way the president has gone out there and is selling this concept, not only in white house public. i commend leader boehner, speaker boehner, setting the appropriate tone in the conference. we know there are differences in both the caucus and the conference, but it is the common t
fiscal challenges that we do need long-term, deficit reduction. that's important for america's credibility, and it's important for america's economy and economic growth. that plan has to be balanced and that means significant revenues, and it has to go around. typically that means the wealthy and well off have to pay their fair share as well. again, these are not new issues. they are ones that were debated. they came up in every debate. even foreign policy debate. and so we think that the american people are on the side of the president and democrats. that is not to say -- [inaudible] we want to remind everyone that there's already been a trillion dollars, over a trillion dollars in spending cuts. and so that is a significant part of this debate, because it happened last year. but just because washington has a short memory doesn't mean we all should have one. and that there's already been sacrifice on behalf of through those discretionary cuts. we are particularly excited doing a lot of work on the fiscal cliff. we talked about medical savings through the programs, address ri
political adviser indicated that medicare and medicaid are the main drivers of our deficit. i know we have seen this morning also several editorial writers indicate the same, that it is important that we put these drivers of the deficit on the table and include them as part of any agreement to avoid the fiscal cliff. as the speaker said, we have done our part. we have put revenues on the table, something we did not do two years ago during the debt ceiling negotiation. we still believe that it is most important for us to address the economic situation in this country where so many people are out of work. that is why we take the position and believe strongly that increase in marginal rates i, income-tax rates, is not the way to produce growth and put people back to work. but we have not seen any good faith effort on the part of its administration to talk about the real problem that we're trying to fix. i am told mr. bowles, some of us will meet with him later today, said earlier this morning there has been no serious discussion by the white house on entitlements, on medicare and medicaid. th
. they were serious about reducing the deficit and the need to get on with it and had some sense of urgency. they were serious about raising revenue from higher income taxpayers, and that includes raising rates, with some flexibility there. they were serious about reducing spending and i would say to you, you have written a lot about the tax side of the equation. we need to read more about the spending side of the equation. they are equally important if we are going to get a balanced plan. they are serious about reducing spending -- that would include reducing spending on health care entitlements. they are serious about protecting the middle class -- you can really feel the president's passion on that. they were serious about restoring confidence in the short and long term so our economy can grow and create jobs. i think the president has always been for a balanced approach come as alan and i have. our message to the president and the congress from day one has been the same -- that is the problem is real, the solutions are painful, and there is not going to be an easy way out of it. the onl
. just raising rates on people making over 250,000, would be a trillion deficit -- >> a trillion dollars, henry, is nothing to be sniffed at. some urged the party to extend the bush-era tax cuts, for the households that earn less than $250,000, to insure the taxes don't go up. who cares anyway? >> sure, there is a point in there. i might dispute the numbers. i would argue as the members of my party, i would argue that we have a spending problem. as opposed to a revenue problem. to my friend steve's remark, about the clinton tax rates, that sounds great to go back to 39%. and yes, that was a time of balanced budgets. but actually, those balanced budgets bear little resemblance to the tax rates. in the clinton years, in the latter clinton years, one, we were in peace time. and two, there was a capital gains tax cut as part of the 1996 package. and let's not forget, most importantly, there was a little small thing at that time called a technology boom. so much so that it led to aacce. and of course there were tax revenues. so pointing to one tax rate at one point in time -- >> there is no o
out of this deficit. >> we've talked about that before. thanks very much. that is the first hour of "the closing bell." stay tuned. up next, a couple ceos with their take on where we go from here. the second hour with maria. i'll see you tomorrow. >>> and it is 4:00 on wall street. do you know where your money is? hi, everybody. welcome back to "the closing bell." i'm maria bartiromo on the floor of the new york stock exchange. the market on a roller coaster ride today. a slight gain on the session, even though the market closed off the best levels of the afternoon. it had been up about 77 at its best. nasdaq composite picked up 23 points. the s&p 500 tonight up 7 1/2, half a percent. the market continues to watch the fiscal cliff. trading action has resolvolved around this. ben, what is your fiscal cliff strategy? what do you want to do with your money in the economy does go off the fiscal cliff? >> yeah, we were worried about that back in september, october. so even though we like the equity markets going into 2013, we wanted to hedge ourselves a little bit, so we took money ou
that bill clinton generated for the george w. bush administration, and turned it into a huge deficit. >> eliot: yes, look, that is a perfect articulation of what has happened over the past 20 years economically. david stockman is still telling the truth about what the true intent was all the way through. quickly, fix the deficit co-alation trying to use what they're creating, the emotional crisis they're creating, and in argument to lower their own corporate taxes once again. does that make sense to you? >> big corporations are sitting on almost 2 trillion-dollar of cash they don't know what to do with. the idea that they some how need more cash is absurd. the ceos, what they want for themselves instead of $8 million or $10 million in cash or in compensation they like more compensation. it has nothing to do with the welfare of the economy over all. >> eliot: former u.s. labor secretary robert reich and my nominee for u.s. treasure secretary, "beyond outrage" robert reich as always, thanks. >> thanks, eliot. >> eliot: turning to weather the prediction calls for cats. viewfinder. [ mal
there will also be a drag on the american economy if our budget deficit widens out forever, if we're irresponsible and governor doesn't work. left with those four choices, think think -- on the flip side, did republicans ask you to spend any nuts -- i think at this point both sides have acknowledged that there's going to be revenue concessions and entertainment concessions. in fact, if you listen to, it again, i'm not a master of the political art here, i'm in washington but i would say if you had these points of views in a business context, as close as they are, i would say a deal would be in reach. >> you see some fundamental level of optimism from lloyd blankfine but a long way to go with the combination of prief pressure and public pressure, like the president is going to exert before we actually go to the flight of fired. i asked the treasury secretary should the president return to wall street. he it must be someone who understands markets, marry. >> me have 33 days to -- head of all pi he told john harwood. marge i will hates have to go up somewhat. he said that's going to put a drag on the
in a winner and a loser. >> our ultimate goal is an agreement that gets our long-term deficit under control in a way that is fair and balanced. >> if the president really wants to reach an agreement, he needs to be talking with members of his own party, right here in washington, trying to broker an agreement. not out there firing up crowds and giving speeches. >> we all know that we've had this spending crisis coming at us like a freight train. and it has to be dealt with. in order to try to come to an agreement, republicans are willing to cut revenue on the table, but it's time for the president and democrats to get serious about the spending problem that our country has. >> but the point is, there is no economic growth being discussed in the fiscal cliff argument, the solution -- there is no economic growth. not possible with what's being proposed. in fact just the exact opposite. obama does not care about economic growth. he cares about wealth transfers, redistribution. >> it's obvious that he's going to have to stand behind some significant changes in entitlements, and i think what they
.o.p. forget tax rates in talks on the deficit, let's look at the spending. the speaker's swift rejection of an idea floated by representative tom cole of oklahoma, a respected party strategist and former chair of the house g.o.p. campaign committee came as the republicans voiced increasing concerns over the debate of the so-called fiscal cliff. boehner said it's time for them to get serious about the spending problem that our country has. republicans complain that for all the talk of coming up with a balanced budget plan, he has made little effort to identify specific proposals beyond increasing taxes on the wealthy. "the white house has not produced any of the balance in the president's described balance proposal that peter roscoe, the house g.o.p.'s deputy whip. boehner and the other house republican leaders will meet on thursday with treasury sec tir tim geitner and the white house's chief congressional li aison to discuss the fiscal cliff. that's the hill newspaper. here's politico this morning, inside the talk, fiscal cliff deal emerging is what some write this morning. and that's f
years, and he has looked at how they have attempted to reduce their budget deficits. based on i.m.f. data which is international monetary fund, he concluded the tax-based deficit reduction was, in his words, always recessionary, always. by contrast, reducing deficits by cutting spending and enacting pro-growth reforms, including tax reform, actually spurred economic growth, according to his study. i think that's consistent with our own economic history. between 1948 and 1961, a period when the highest income tax rate rose from 82% to 91%, we went through some tough times. we had four recessions. thankfully, our exports that helped rebuild europe after world war ii helped keep the economy moving. reducing the top tax rate to 70% also helped. but the 1970's were still a period of stagnation, recession, double-digit unemployment, double-digit interest rates, double-digit inflation. it was when ronald reagan reduced rates down to 28% that we saw this impressive period of growth, maybe the most impressive ever. this is something that we saw in 1997 again when capital gains cut under
legislative chief rob neighbors bring the president's deficit-cutting plan to capitol hill today. >> i am very open to a fair and balanced approach to reduce our deficit. >> reporter: republicans want to know, does that approach include the government spending less money? >> we've put revenue on the table, as long as it's accompanied by serious spending cuts. >> reporter: white house negotiators are meeting with boehner and top republicans and democrats. executives from big companies heard the plan wednesday at the white house. at least one thinks there could be a deal here. >> if i were involved in a negotiation like this and everybody was purporting to be where they are, i would say that an agreement was reachable. >> i'm hopeful, but i wouldn't put me anywhere near optimistic. >> reporter: one conservative republican is now suggesting that while negotiations continue on whether the wealthy to pay more, congress should stop tax rates from going up on the middle class now. >> we're not going to raise taxes on those people, and i think we ought to go ahead and make that abundantly clear to eve
the city needs, this is not going to solve the city's deficit problems because the deficit problems are endemic. the start of the federal government.
, a lot of the other issues surrounding deficit reduction are going to be a whole lot easier. if we get this wrong, the economy is going to go south. we don't have a lot of time here. we have a few weeks to get this thing done. we could get it done tomorrow. optimistically, i don't think we are going to get it done tomorrow. >> the white house is using all social media resources to get the message out and put pressure on the republicans. >> today, i'm asking congress to listen to the people who sent us here to serve. i'm asking americans all across the country to make your voice heard. tell members of congress what a $2,000 tax hike would mean to you. call your members of congress, write them an e-mail, post it on their facebook walls. you can tweet it using the hash tag my 2 k, not y2 k. >> the president was laughing about you the strategy, seriously effective. the my2k was one of the top trends on twitter all day long. republicans aren't too happy. they are getting outflanked. >> if the president wants to reach an agreement, he needs to be talking with the members of his own party rig
of 2013-type solution. but the reality of dealing with this economy, its debt, it's deficit, spending priorities and all of that is not going to get done in the next five weeks. so let's be honest about that. i agree with you. i think that they're going to come to a short-term stopgap solution that deals with the cliff, that deals with the bush tax cuts that expire, that deal with the increase in unemployment rate that's due to hit in january. they'll deal with those short-term things, but the long-term systemic substantive points that need to be addressed will not get addressed in the next four weeks. >> steve, how would you markets respond if they decide we'll have a short-term fix but we haven't actually managed to come up with the real healthy response to what the economy needs? >> you're seeing a total kick the can. we really got nothing done this december, tough luck, we just want to extend it six months, i think the markets would be jittery but would probably accept it. going over the cliff -- and we were talking about this the other night in washington with a bunch of ceos," g
? >> because it's not really kind of a huge driver of the deficit we're talking about right now. it's really the health care programs. but i think if you just pull back and make it really simple for a second, what you see are the democrats are saying, wait a second. increasing taxes a little bit on the rich or significantly on the rich, however you want to look at it, is pretty popular with the public or at least has broad public support. cutting entitlements is not very popular. it could be the right thing to do. perhaps there's a way to do it. but it's not very popular. you're asking us to not do the thing and say that you want to help us do the thing that is popular. and you want us the democrats to go on the table and lay out the details of the thing that is really unpopular. are you crazy? >> your short answer is no, we will not get any significant entitlement reform? >> not now. i think what the democrats want to do is kind of box those tax hikes up and get them agreed to in principle. kind of break the republicans' back a little on that. then, okay, maybe we can have a discussion on e
, we have a trillion dollar annual deficit and this would not close that gap at all. so the president needs to come up with a plan and for better or worse going to require leadership. no member of the senate or the house is going to be able to do this, this is something the president has to do by himself and he can't do it on the campaign trail. >> let me ask you this because you wrote an op-ed today and you wrote about divided government about the deal. you said divided government means that neither democrats nor republicans will be able to pass legislation along strictly partisan lines. we cannot tax our way back to budget surpluses and economic prosperity without major spending cuts and entitle 347b9 reforms we will continue running a huge deficit regardless of what anyone does on either side. for every dollar of revenue you give him, he'll give you $2.50 of spending cuts. if he gave you that on spending cuts, it would be 8$850 billon year would you do that? >> the president has said a lot of things, but what counts is what he's willing to put on the table and so far, he hasn't put
longer, has always been talking about a balanced approach to tackling the deficit. when he talks about balanced approach, he means tax revenue and cutting spending, however the only part of the conversation we're having is about tax revenue. no conversation whatsoever about the spending part of this equation. that's because he has no intention of cutting spending. >> sean: senator chambliss is clear, it's increasing revenue, getting more money from the american taxpayer. isn't that a tax? >> yes. what they fail to see or don't want to see or acknowledge this country doesn't have a revenue problem. there's plenty of revenue coming into the treasury. remember the "t" in tea party stands for tax enough already. we have a severe spending problem. before barack obama became president, sean, federal government spending was about 18%, 19% of gdp. barack obama and the democrats have pushed it up to 24% to 25%. >> we're talking about spending more money to artificially prop up the markets. the problem is, sean, republicans are using the word revenue rather than tax hikes. the national conversat
deficit. we still have, the president still has $1 trillion plus deficit if this next fiscal year. he had it for the past four and he has it for the next four if he follows the same course. that is not a road to prosperity or job creation. or economic vitality. >>neil: i want to be clear, congressman. republicans do not appear to be on the same page on this, as republicans, are you saying your view, hiking the rates or adjusting in any way is felt universally by your colleagues? we know a couple of them have bolted from that but you are going to hold in lock step on that position? >>guest: there is a universality in our conference with 240 of us in the house of representatives so there are 240 different opinions but by and large the majority of us firmly believe raising tax rates is counterproductive and doesn't solve the problem. >>neil: always a pleasure, sir, thank you. take the money and run? not quite but quite a run of companies hiking dividends. and disney is the latest and it will probably not be the last and the calendar could be the reason because january 1, you could, taxed to
as part of a long-term deficit reduction. if we don't ask higher income people to pay more, we're going to have to take it out on everybody else and the president is clear, you cannot continue to play political gains with the full faith and credit of the united states debt and so that was all part of the plan the president has put forward. >> now, with all of the talk of divide, politico is, however, reporting that there is some framework of a deal already taking shape. let me give you what they are saying. and the piece says, there is no chance taxes are not going to go up for people making north of $250,000 and virtually no chance that doesn't include their tax rates, too. is there a framework of a deal that you believe we can come together or are we still very much divided in terms of parties in the congress? >> well, i think it's premature to say that there's a deal in place. even the framework of a deal in place. but i agree with the politico reporting to the extent they concluded that higher income individuals are going to be paying more and that tax rates have to go up. because t
be asked to testify whether or not psycho paths have affective deficits. absolutely they do. there has been hundreds of years of psychiatric research shows that they do. you have this two prong thing. on the one hand more dangerous if you release them and don't treat them. on the other hand, they're affectively different. there was a very nice article in the "new york times" magazine on mother's day about children who have these emerging traits and how we would develop and understand and treat them. it's a small percentage. my goal is to develop better treatment so they can keep them off that trajectory towards life course persistent problems. >> are you saying that people that have the brain structure that you have identified will always be lacking in volitional control or impulse receive to the extent that they are criminals? do we have a subset of people that are criminals because of their brains? >> i should really differentiate psychopathy from criminality. there are a lot of reasons why individuals engage in different criminal activity. it's a very small percentage of prisoners that a
vanishing. >> reporter: treasury secretary tim geithner and rob nabors bring the president's deficit-cutting plan to capitol hill today. >> i'm open to a fair and balanced approach to reduce our deficit. >> reporter: republicans want to know if it includes the government spending less money. >> we put revenue on the table as long as it's accompanied by serious cuts. >> reporter: white house leaders are meeting with boehner and top republicans. at least one analyst thinks there could be a deal here. >> if i were involved in a negotiation like this and everybody was purporting to be where they are, i would say that an agreement was reachable. >> i'm hopeful but don't put me down anywhere near optimistic. >> reporter: one conservative republican is now suggesting while negotiations continue on whether the wealthy should pay more, congress should stop tax rates from going up on the middle class now. >> we're not going to raise taxes on those people. i think we ought to go ahead and make that abundantly clear to everybody and take them out of the negotiations. >> reporter: bottom line, no
secretary tim geithner and white houlegis chief rob neighbors bring the deficit-cutting plan to capitol hill today. >> i'm very open to a fair and balanced approach to reduce our defic deficit. >> reporter: republicans want to know does that approach include the government spending less money. >> we put revenue on the table as long as it's accompanied by serious spending cuts. >> reporter: white house negotiators are meeting with boehner and top republicans and democrats, executives from big companies heard the plan wednesday at the white house. at least one thinks there could be a deal here. >> if i were involved in negotiation like this and everybody was purporting to be where they are, i would say that an agreement is reachable. >> i'm hopeful but i wouldn't put me anywhere near optimistic. >> reporter: one conservative republican is suggesting while negotiations continue on whether the wealthy should pay more, congress should stop tax rates from going up on the middle class now. >> we're not going to raise taxes on those people and i think we ought to go ahead and make that abundantly cl
party is being realistic about the enormity of the debt and deficit issue. what you just described is a very easy deal. it is sitting on the table, most of it is automatic. of the deal isn't reached in any case which is going to prompt something getting worked out but we need to cut about more than that. we are spending 23% of our gdpp federal government is, in one fashion or another and taking in 18% and that is not going to change all that much with the outlines of this deal. the democrats are not realistic about how much has to be cut and republicans are not realistic about how much taxes need to go. connell: the democratic side of it since we're speaking with you and delve into that a little more. if you are right about certain aspects of this, if dagen mcdowell and me can come after the president said he wanted the one$.6 trillion in revenue and say you wants $1.2 trillion because john boehner had $800 billion on the table last times those with the difference we are not exactly political geniuses all the respected political but anyone could have written that story and come up
rates for millionaires. are you kidding me? this will not make a dent in the deficit. here to disagree with me is christian dorsey from the economic policy institute. christian, thank you so much for coming back to the show. you are always a spirited debate partner. tell me why you like this. >> i'll tell you, melissa, to me this is not so much about the revenue that it would raise but about the message and principle it stand for, that we can't in this country have a situation where people are making millions of dollars effectively paying lower tax rates than america's middle class families. the principle of this, of this rule is actually what's most important. the revenue that it raises, it is important because it is not chump change but it is not in of itself going to change our deficit conversation but the principle is one that is extremely important. liz: but you're talking about wealthier people. well thinker people pay a higher average tax rate. everybody pulls out the stat that they want to look at. if you look at average tax rate of the top 1%, it is 23%, almost 24%. i mean, th
, that another really important part of this conversation in addition to long term deficit reduction is making sure that we get sustained economic recovery. we saw some good numbers today, but we want to make sure that we sustain that recovery. and extending middle class text cuts is part of it, but so is investing in our infrastructure, so are other elements of the president's jobs plan that should be part of this overall agreement. >> we have seen several liberal democrats to say that it is better to go off that cliff than to get a bad deal. and i'm wondering if you agree because it seems like the ceos who came out of the meeting with the president yesterday were most worried or at least seriously worried about the effect of not getting a deal on time and the effect that will have on the economy. >> we absolutely want to avoid going over the fiscal cliff because it would be a big drag on the economy. >> but are you willing to do that? >> what we're willing to do is come up with a package that both accelerates economic recovery, but also begins to reduce the long term deficit and the presiden
of the bipartisan team that offered a deficit reduction plan in 2010. >> i'm hopeful but don't put me down anywhere near in optimistic category. >> reporter: >> every week, he spends campaigning for his ideas is a week that we're not solving the problem. it's completely counterproductive. >> reporter: treasury secretary will be on the capitol hill. president obama travels to philadelphia friday to push for an extension of tax cuts for washington families. >> still today, really would. in renewed hopes about am the dows. the -- president obama plans to host this former rival. during this election, victory speech, um remember that the president said to look forward to talking with romney about how the two men can work together. >>> a lot of hopefuls in 42 states have less than an hour to get in on the record paul ball jackpot. injuries dreaming of the potential pay off. $550 million. that's more than half a billion dollars. now the odds of correctly matching the numbers are 1/175 million. california does not participate in the power ball lottery. >>> but for a good cause, the 90-year-old says she'll
shared his optimism and stocks closed higher. congress must reach a compromise on the deficit reduction plan by the end of the year. otherwise, tax hikes will automatically kick in. >>> talk about a power lunch. president obama and mitt romney, who will dine at the white house together tomorrow afternoon. this will be the first time they have met since their final debate. the meeting will be private. no aids and no media. >>> armed with guns and sledgehammers, the daring bay area jewelry heist that took 75 seconds to pull off. >>> well, that and $7 will get you a cup of coffee. what's so special about starbucks' new brew? >>> a $580 million jackpot is up for grabs tonight. now california wants in on the action. how soon until you can play powerball? ,, sledgehammers, hit a bay ara jewelry store. it happened in los gatos. c5 reporter kiet >>> they were in and out in a flash. two thieves waving guns and sledgehammers hit a bay area jewelry store. it happened in los gatos. kiet do shows us just how quickly they struck. >> reporter: for employees at this fine jeweler's, the surveillance vid
needs and deficit and my belief that the funding will come from muni operating money. worry now seeing that's the case, that muni is considering using some of this maintenance money for the free muni program rather than to invest in the system, purchase vehicles, rehabilitate vehicles, and over-wise make the system more reliable. once a free muni pilot program ends there will be enormous pressure to extend the program and that pressure almost certainly will include using more funding using to improve muni's reliant. >> vice president elsbernd: i need to interrupt. we have a overflow room that is open across the the hall in the board chambers. these first two items on muni's performance will take a good 45 minutes to at least an hour. there are folks who are standing, that are here to testify on these items. if you are not here for these items, but are on the other items, we would really appreciate it if you would let those, who are standing, whoer here to testify, have your seats. you can go in the other room. it's on tv. when this item is done you will be able to come back in. it woul
in and rob neighbors bring the deficit cutting plan to capitol hill today. >> reporter: negotiators are meeting with boehner and top democrats. they heard the plan wednesday at the white house. at least one thinks there could be a deal here. >> if i were involved in the negotiations like this and everybody was purporting to be where they are, i would say that an agreement is reachable. >> i'm hopeful. it wouldn't put me anywhere near optimistic. >> reporter: one conservative is suggesting that while negotiations continue, congress should stop tax rates going up on the middle class now. >> we're not going to raise taxes on those people. i think we should make that clear to everybody. >> reporter: bottom line, no deal yet. both sides are still talking. and both sides signalling that they're willing to give some ground to get this done and get it done on time. lynn. >> thanks so much. >>> it's not how he wanted to get there but former governor mitt romney heads to the white house. president obama is hosting his campaign rival at a private lunch. no reporters will be allowed in. it is t
deficit that muni has been experiencing for many years and that's not necessarily fair and is based on an erroneous dichotomy, the case what ed risken was saying. we hope you can keep and open mind and invest in our youth by supporting this program. thank you. you. next speaker. i have a few more cards. i'm going to call them so i've called through all the cards. carl noe, jarron brown, paul slade, walter brown, amelia, and peter louderborn. those are the cards i have. thank you. >> good morning, government and audit oversight committee. waller james, here representing the central city srojp collaborative and all the sro collaboratives around the city and also power, and also mainly the youth. i just have a couple of points that i want to make and just give you guys a small personal story. i remember back in the day like in the 90's, living with my sister, or just being expose to do like children that are in the ghetto, different areas that might not have too much guidance, you wonders why they don't get up and go to school. some of it might be due3y%( &3çy some of it might be due
. >> -- that we are willing to do the hard things required to reduce the testify sit. we want to raise -- deficit. we want to raise taxes, cut defense -- we're willing to do all four of those things. megyn: marc, how does taking money out of medicare and giving it to obamacare cut spending? [laughter] >> it doesn't. >> that's not what i said, megyn. that's not what i said. >> it doesn't cut spending. they cut money out of medicare and put it to fund obamacare, but president obama has not put forward a plan to deal with the entitlement crisis. he put forward no plan on social security, medicare or medicaid, which he himself admits is what is driving the debt and driving the real fiscal crisis. so they have put forward no plans whatsoever, and when paul ryan and others have put forward our plans, they've pilied them for it. i'm glad president obama's meeting with simon. i'd love for him to meet with john john boehner. [laughter] megyn: simon's got a lot of good ideas. were you in that meeting with the unions and the progressive groups that the president had -- >> no. i was in a different meeting. t
with the deficit. you have suggested something which coincidentally is called the buffett rule which i think, like lou gehrig's disease is very unbelievable that this rule would just happen to be promoted by -- >> the diseases were already taken. (laughter) (applause) >> jon: i assume bufferin has something to do with it. you have come out and said you would prefer something where the rich pay a flat -- at least 30%. on their money. why do you say that? >> well, if they make over a million, i say on the amount over a million they ought to pay at least 30% and over $10 million they ought to pay 35%. most of the people -- in fact, virtually all of the people in my office, 20 or so people, between payroll and income taxes they pay more than 30%. a number of the extremely wealthy people pay less than 15% and some pay less than 10% and some pay nothing. >> jon: this is because of capital gains and the cayman islands. >> the whole works. >> jon: and bags that are kept dangling. (laughter) >> you're getting warm. >> jon: exactly. what then about the argument where they say that's double taxation if you d
the deficit, let your member of congress know. if you believe we can solve this problem through compromise, send that message. >> let your member of congress know. send that message said the president. the american people did. so many american people did that congressional websites and phone lines crashed after the president's speech. house phone circuits were so overwhelmed that an alert went out to members of congress that if they were expecting any really important phone calls therks shou they should try using a different phone. if you tried to visit the websites for john boehner or michele bachmann after the president's call to action, you just got a server to busy message. >>> last year, in the fall, the president went and did it again. the president went on a multi-state barn storming campaign style tour to push for the passage of his jobs bill. again, he asked the american people to get involved in that fight directly. he asked the american people to talk to congress. >>> i want you to call. i want you to e-mail. i want you to tweet. i want you to fax. i want you to visit. i want yo
. >> dana: all right. >> eric: obama have to advertise he promised to -- [ laughter ] -- cut the deficit in half? >> dana: where will it end? >> kimberly: we want an apology. >> dana: super pac ad with apology. >> kimberly: deliberately dezeed the american people. >> bob: that is not true. >> dana: we'll ponder that. coming up, 5 a 50 million reasons you might not want to win tonight's powerball jackpot. brian has all of those next on "the five." ♪ ♪ [ male announcer ] we all make bad decisions. like say, gas station sushi. cheap is good. and sushi, good. but cheap sushi, not so good. it's like that super-low rate on not enough car insurance. pretty sketchy. ♪ and then there are the good decisions. like esurance. their coverage counselor tool helps you choose the right coverage for you at a great price. [ stomach growls ] without feeling queasy. that's insurance for the modern world. esurance. now backed by allstate. click or call. morning because my back hurt so bad. the sleep number bed conforms to you. i wake up in the morning with no back pain. i can adjust it if i need to...if
our bond rating to drop is the fact we're running unsustainable deficits and not dealing with our problem. that's exactly what the -- what the speaker is trying to get at. in terms of this issue, again, look, these are all people i like. these are people i agree with philosophically. i also want to do a good deal for the american taxpayer, including 98% of them. if we can take care of their issue -- i think we'll win the debate. i think they agree with us fundamentally that increases in taxes on anybody cost jobs. that's not good. but as long as it's owe their head their taxes might go up, i think they don't really have time to focus on that debate. again, i just think we ought to take that off. we agree with the president on that. but i respect the speaker. i support the speaker. >> we'll watch how this plays out. >>> joining me is democratic, barbara boxer wrote in politico today. we're looking there at a picture of, senator, of tip o'neill and reagan signing the bill. >> yes. >> on social security reform. you spoke about an earlier issue in your piece today about how they got t
prosperity for america, helps reduce our budget deficit, is humane, is enforceable, no one said it would be easy but that's what the people send us hoar to do and regardless of the outcome of this particular bill, we are simply taking another week in avoiding addressing the real issues of the imdepration crisis in this country. i encourage my colleagues to vote against the rule which was a closed process and doesn't allow for consideration of even noncontroversial amendments such as my ev-5 amendment. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from florida. mr. nugent: mr. speaker, and to my good friend from colorado, we agree on so many issues. particularly as it relates to immigration reform. we agree. i think this is the first step in regards to where we need to go. you have sold a very persuasive argument in regards to why it is so important so important that we have a stem vee is program. -- visa program. while it's important to us to keep that brainpower we educated in the united states, keep them here in this country
time than next year to work together on a comprehensive plan to bring down the deficits. >> white house spokesman jay carney broke new ground declaring today the president does want spending cuts, listed in his budget plan to be included in the fiscal cliff talks. >> hold up the budget and say democrats on capitol hill vote for including the spending cuts in this deal to avoid the fiscal cliff. that is not what they are doing now. should they include those? >> yes. i think that, and i know that democrats accept that this has to be it, a balanced package, that includes revenues and cuts and spending cuts. >> months ago, the budget carney held up was voted down by the entire senate. 99-0. meaning no democratic support. earlier, dick durbin insisted spending cuts from entitlement reform will not be part of the talks while pelosi spell noncommittal whether the cuts will be in the deal. still, the administration is trying to breathe life to the talks, with vice president biden shopping at new costco in washington, picking up a big screen tv and apple pie and insisting he is optimistic of a d
in deficit in this state now for a decade and, i don't believe those promises either. there has been some cutting but it is cutting after there was enormous spending way beyond what was permitted by the constitution. i mean deficit spending is a violation of the state constitution. do they care about that in sacramento? they blow right by it. neil: but you don't think what is going on here now, governor, governor davis in a second, is a harbinger? in other words maybe voters here as they have elsewhere, rightly or wrongly are saying you know what? we cut a lot or tried to cut. we never make much progress on it. i guess only thing to do to avoid fiscal armageddon is just hike taxes. we hope it is not on us. we'll start going after the rich. >> that is number one class warfare. and number two you keep piling up the debt. ultimately you're in a position, as we are in today at the federal level, where most of the debt isn't even on the books. neil: that's right. >> i mean what is said to be the national debt is about one fifth of the actual national debt. neil: you're right. unfunded liabilit
-term cost of how it will really poisoned the well in these negotiations. we are talking about deficit reduction, and the president is proposing new spending at top of all the other spending. republicans going into the deficit reduction talks talking about another dividend tax cut is something like that. a very poisonous way to start since the negotiations between two sites. the second thing that is important here is how we are viewing these jobless benefits. the administration is firming in in terms of job creation. that is not what they are. gerri: this is a study they did it, extending jobless benefits would create 300,000 jobs. i had to read it twice to figure out what they were talking about . and it still made no sense to me. explain the contorted logic to work here. >> thee're saying by putting money into the pockets of unemployed people that will deal to spend it on rant and consumer goods which will create jobs in the real-estate industry in the retail industry. the problem is a does not take into account that the people have to look for jobs that would also be doing that. dou
spending her hard-earned tax dollars like water, running trillion-dollar deficits year after year. she's angry and she has every right to be angry. so what are we going to do about it? lately we've heard a lot of talk about raising revenues, but not nearly enough talk about bringing the federal government down to the right size, about matching spending to the resources we have, about balancing the federal budget. oh, we hear about a balanced approach, but that's just a way of saying we need to increase taxes. actually, we don't need to increase taxes. the best thing we could do would be to not increase taxes. the best thing we can do is to raise revenues by making our economy as healthy and strong as it can be. that means we need to help our businesses grow and hire. that's become way too hard to do in the past couple of years. a businessman in duchess county, new york, said he's going to have to limit the number of employees he has to less than 50 so he won't be subject to penalties under the 2010 health law. so right now the federal government is keeping him from offering jobs. that
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 98 (some duplicates have been removed)